Why Mary Is Not The Mother Of God
Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians frequently refer to Mary as the “Mother of God,” which Protestants object to. Considering the claim of the Catholic Church may even find the name to be a stumbling block. Why? Because to them “Mother of God” implies that God somehow has His origin in Mary.
But how could the Creator of all things possibly have a mother?
In our Facebook group, we once had a discussion with a Catholic Catechist about the proper use of the term “Mother of God.” According to him, the term is not meant to exalt Mary but to give her the honor and respect that is rightfully hers for having been chosen to conceive and give birth to Jesus.
Since it is one of the group’s objectives to refute unbiblical doctrines, we tried explaining to him that although Mary is the mother of Jesus, she cannot be the mother of God. This is because God being the Creator of all things in heaven and on earth had no mother and did not need to have one.
Mother of God
Should we call Mary “Mother of God?”
In his book “Mary: Another Redeemer,” Dr. James R. White says that this is the single most misused theological term around. The logic seems inescapable: Jesus is God, come in human flesh. Mary is Jesus’ mother. Hence, Mary is the mother of God. What could be simpler?
Below is a chapter of the book where Dr. White explains more extensively why Mary is not the mother of God. He said that if everyone would just use the term “mother of God” to communicate just that – that Jesus Christ was truly and completely God – there would be no reason for him to include this brief chapter.
But most of the time when the phrase is used, the person using it is not in any way commenting on the fact that Jesus Christ was God and Man on the earth. They are not speaking about Christ at all, but about Mary, and they are using the title to give her a position of honor and power.
If you want to know more about the controversial movement to name Mary as Co-Redeemer with Christ, get the eBook here.
The Origin of the Term
What did the term mean in the ancient church? How is it being misused today? Anyone who reads the writing of the ancient church knows that the word translated “Mother of God” is the Greek term theotokos. Literally, the word means “God-bearer.” It became a title for Mary so that you often find her simply being called theotokos in devotional and theological writings. But where did the term come from?
Around the beginning of the fourth century, Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria, first used this term when speaking of Mary. It is no coincidence that it was the teaching of Alexander that prompted the most famous “heretic” of all time – Arius, the great denier of the deity of Christ – to begin propagating his heresy.
Evidently, at that time, even in its earliest uses, the term was meant to say something about Jesus, not Mary. That is, the term was Christological in force. It was focused on Christ and was meant to safeguard the truth about His absolute deity.
Understanding Theotokos
The term really entered into the “orthodox” vocabulary through its usage at the Councils of Ephesus in AD 431) and more importantly, Chalcedon in AD 325. We can learn the most about how this term was originally understood by taking a moment to understand why it appears in the creed produced at Chalcedon.
The debate over the complete deity of Christ had lasted for many decades, continuing on well after the Council of Nicea had finished its work in AD 325, not coming to completion until the Council of Constantinople in AD 381. But once this great truth was properly safeguarded, other questions began to arise.
One of the questions went like this: Granted that Jesus Christ was truly God and inhuman flesh, how then are we to understand the relationship between the divine and the human in Christ? Was He really a man at all? Did His deity swallow up His humanity? Was there some mixture of the two? Or was Jesus two people: one divine and one human, merely sharing one body?
Sadly, the debate was undertaken in anything but a calm and respectful climate. More time was spent on political maneuvering than upon meaningful exegesis. But despite the rancor of the debate, the resulting understanding was very important, especially for our understanding of the term theotokos.
Debate Over the Nature of Christ
One of the principal participants in the debate over the nature of Christ was a man named Nestorius. But since he was eventually condemned as a heretic, we have some doubts as to whether we a completely accurate (or fair) view of his beliefs, as they have come down to us primarily through the writings of his enemies.
Basically, Nestorius objected to the use of the word theotokos. He quite rightly expressed concern that the word could be easily misunderstood. But most importantly, his denial of the propriety of theotokos led him to insist that Mary was the mother of the human “element” of Christ, which resulted in a functional separation of the divine from the human in Christ. The basic danger of Nestorius’ position, then, was that it led to a Jesus who was two “persons,” with no real connection between the divine and the human.
Jesus is Fully Man and Fully God
Those who defended the use of theotokos did so by insisting that the Messiah was fully human and fully divine from the moment of conception, hence, the Child who was born was not only a human Child with a deity dwelling in him but was the God-Man, the Incarnate One.
Chalcedon insisted that Jesus was one Person with two distinct natures, the divine, and the human. The divine did not “swallow up” the human, nor was it “mixed” with the human to create something that was neither fully God nor fully man. Nor was Jesus schizophrenic – a human person, Jesus, and a divine Person, separate from Him. He was one person with two natures.
What is vitally important today is that the term “God-bearer” as it was used in the creed and as it was applied to Mary in these controversies said something about the nature of Christ, not the nature of Mary. “Mother of God” is a phrase that has proper theological meaning only in reference to Christ.
Hence, any use of the term that is not simply saying, “Jesus is fully God, one divine Person with two natures,” is using the term anachronistically, and cannot claim the authority of the early church for such usage.
The Misuse of the Term Today
Outside of the seminary classes and theological debates about the Trinity, you will not hear the term “Mother of God” used in a historically proper and theologically accurate way. That is, every time you hear the title used outside those contexts it was being used to say something about Mary rather than something about Christ.
Obviously, Nestorius was right about one thing: the term is liable to serious misuse and misunderstanding.
Conclusion
Mary is not the mother of God in the sense that she gave rise to the being of God. We normally use the word “mother” to refer to the one who gave rise to us as individuals, and from whom we derived our human nature. Yet the divine Person who became Jesus, the eternal Son of God (Colossians 1:13-17), the Logos (John 1:1-14), has existed eternally and is the Creator of Mary.
Mary was used to bring the Incarnate One into the world, but she did not add to or give rise to the Eternal son who came into the world through her. Her Child was fully divine (hence she is theotokos) but she herself did not give rise to the divinity of her Son. For this reason, there can be nothing about the term theotokos that in any way exalts Mary, but only Christ.
Of course, if this is true, then the vast majority of the use of the phrase “Mother of God” in our world today is simply in error. Prayers addressed to “Mother of God” that seek her intercession and ascribe to her power and glory and honor are using the title in a way completely foreign to the biblical truths that gave rise to it in the first place.
And the fact that, in general, the term is avoided as improper outside the narrow spectrum in which it speaks to the important truth of the uni-personality of Christ, as well as His full deity, is a testimony to the spiritual sensitivity of believing Christians.
We cannot help but conclude that the use of “Mother of God” as a title for Mary that leads to her being seen in quasi-divine categories is nothing but a gross misunderstanding of the true relationship between the Blessed Virgin of Nazareth and the eternal God who sent the eternal Son to be born of her.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate, I may earn a commission when you use any links on this page to make a purchase, but at no additional cost to you.
Reference:
Mary-Another Redeemer? – eBook By James R. White
The New “Mary” Question
Millions of petitioners from around the world are imploring Pope John Paul II to recognize the Virgin Mary as “Co-Redeemer” with Christ, elevating the topic of Roman Catholic views of Mary to national headlines and widespread discussion.
Mary Another Redeemer? sidesteps hostile rhetoric and cites directly from Roman Catholic sources to explore this volatile topic.
It traces how Mary of the Bible esteemed mother of the Lord, obedient servant, and chosen vessel of God has become the Immaculately Conceived, Bodily Assumed Queen of Heaven, viewed as Co-Mediator with Christ and now recognized as Co-Redeemer by many in the Roman Catholic Church.
Mary Another Redeemer? is a fresh insight into the woman the Bible calls “blessed among women,” and an invitation to single-minded devotion to God’s truth.
26 Replies to “Why Mary Is Not The Mother Of God”
Hi,
It doesn’t seem to align with the concept of the Hypostatic Union.
Jesus was not born as a “human with a divine nature” nor was his human and divine nature born separately – they all came forth from Mary’s womb as a complete person, and He was complete man and complete God, so it feels we are forcibly separating His being when we say Mary cannot be called the mother of God.
He was not two persons, one divine, one mortal, sharing the same body. As the Athanasian Creed proclaims: “that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Substance of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world. Perfect God; and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood.
Who although he is God and Man; yet he is not two, but one Christ. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood into God. One altogether; not by confusion of Substance; but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man; so God and Man is one Christ; ”
There are no two Christs, just as our body and soul does not make us two humans.
The fact that someone decided to manipulate the concept to fit his own heretic agenda does not invalidate it. Even the doctrine of the Trinity had been twisted numerous times by cultists – should we then consider saying that God is not a Trinity?
In Luke 1:41-43, “When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”
“The mother of my Lord” – who was Elizabeth’s Lord? Was it not God? Did she serve more than one master? And she was filled with the Holy Spirit when she exclaimed those words. I would be very concerned if what she said was blasphemous – claiming a mortal foetus to be God (her Lord) and the Holy Spirit allowed it, especially when she was saying it to the woman chosen by God to bear the child.
And Jesus, as noted in Hebrews 2, would call us brothers and sisters before God (declare His name to His brothers and sisters). How can we, as mortals devoid of any divinity, be siblings to the Son of God? Two words – divine grace.
Ultimately I think it boils down to where or who our eyes are on – do we see the mother of God title as something Mary earn by her own merit? Or do we look towards God and recognise that title as the glory that comes upon faithful servants of God by His grace?
I don’t think there’s anybody out there saying Jesus is two persons.
Jesus is one person . But when He was born into this world, He was not born with both the divine and human natures. He existed eternally as divine, God the Son. When He was conceived by the Holy Spirit, He did not stop being God. Rather, He added humanity to His deity.
You may want to check out Dave Hunt’s quick answer to this:
https://youtu.be/pKzEgny76pc
Blessings!
Why do Catholics even find it necessary to give Mary “power and honor.” when in fact. Jesus Christ never gave her any? He referred to her as “woman.”
Hey Pansy, thanks for stopping by.
This has been my question for many years which played a major role in my quest for the truth. Having gone to a Catholic high school, I was taught (and trained) to pray the rosary, to put Mary at a level where she is almost as divine as God, and do so many rituals that are not in line with biblical truth.
I am just thankful that I finally came to realize that Mary is not who Roman Catholics say she is, i.e. the Mother of God.
If the New Testament believers and Jesus Himself did not regard Mary as anything more than a mere vessel for God, why should Christians today do so?
Shalom!
Since I started to attend a Bible Study and personally accepted the Lord Jesus as my LORD and SAVIOR, my perspective was changed and now I agree with your theological stand that Mary is not the mother of God. Instead, Mary was instrument by God to bear and gave birth to the prophesied Messiah the Savior of the humankind, the LORD Jesus Christ, God the Son, the second persona of the Triune God.
Mary is just an ordinary woman obedient to the will of God and became an earthly mother of Jesus but not the mother of GOD.
Hello Teacher Encarnacion,
How are you?
Thanks for taking time to read the article and for your comment.
Having grown up in the “traditional faith or religion” I was taught to believe that Mary is the Mother of God. You know that prayer we repeatedly recite especially during the Black Rosary month? Yeah, I memorized that.
But I praise God for opening up my understanding. When we come to realize that going to heaven has got nothing to do with religion and good works, but has everything to do with placing our faith in Christ and in what He has done for us, that’s when we can truly say that we have been set free.
As John 8:32 says, “And you will know the truth and the truth shall set you free.”
Indeed, Mary was Jesus’ earthly mother. She was God’s instrument in birthing the Lord Jesus but she is not the mother of God.
God bless you more.
Hi,
It might be helpful to get a little clarity on the Catholic teaching about Mary and the traditional title ‘Mother of God.’
“Mother” does not mean “source” of anything more than our Lord’s human physicality in this context. It never ever did. It’s a personal term. God created his soul and the person to whom human body and soul were united in the Incarnation is not created at all. That person is God the Word-Logos-Son.
I would not refer to my own mother as the mother of my flesh or my humanity or my body, although I received some of those things through her; rather I would refer to her as the mother of “me.” MY mother, since “I” am the personal subject of my own flesh/humanity/body.
In the same way the eternal second person of the Trinity, the Logos-Word, would be referring to the personal subject of his own flesh/humanity/body acquired in the Incarnation were he to say to us in reference to Mary: “She is MY mother.”
In fact, the “my” in the following two sentences, were they said by Jesus, would be the exact same person referent:
God is MY father
Mary is MY mother
The personal subject signified by MY is the same (the Eternal Word who became human) although the natures through which it is possible to make these utterances are different, divine in the first and human in the second.
Part of the reason the titles “Mother of God” and “Theotokos” were used in the first place was because they make it clear that there is not more than one personal subject in Christ (not two I’s, one divine the other merely human), since that would be a denial that God the Son truly became the Son of Mary, and on the flip side a denial of our Lord’s true divinity.
Those who deny that Mary is the mother of God usually intend well and don’t mean to profess a counterfeit Christ, but in fact that is the logical consequence of their position and the reason for which the Catholic Church’s use of the title is needed.
Also, “God” in the title “mother of God” refers to the personal subject of the Logos-Word-Son through his human nature, not in his divine nature. “Mother of God” in Catholic theology and devotion always means specifically “mother of the Word Incarnate” because in Trinitarian theology “God” can refer to the whole divine nature OR to any one of the divine persons distinctly depending upon context.
In “mother of God” it refers to the divine Son in his humanity, not the divine nature which the Word has with the Father and Spirit. This has always been the case. The fear that it might refer to the divine nature and somehow make Mary the source of his divinity, or even more bizarrely the mother of God the Father and the Holy Spirit, is not founded upon anything in the Catholic tradition – and in fact would contradict expressly Catholic trinitarian doctrine (see the Nicene Creed).
It is only confusion on the part of those who are unable or unwilling to carefully examine Catholic teaching. Notice that Catholics never refer to Mary as “God the Mother”.
Also, contra James White, certainly the title “mother of God” refers to Mary and says something about her just as the term “church of God” refers not directly to God but to the people of God and says something about them. It says that they are the recipients of God’s grace.
This is the whole view of Mary in Catholic theology as well. Everything else Catholics attribute to her is based not upon the confused idea that she is somehow divine. It is based upon the grace God has given her as his creature, child, and (in the case of his Son through the human nature he acquired) mother.
Thank you.
Hello Thomas,
Thanks for dropping by and sharing with us the stand of the Catholic Church in regards to calling Mary the Mother of God, I appreciate it.
However, I would like to emphasize that Dr. James White based his arguments in his book “Mary, Another Redeemer” from a Catholic publication. Do you happen to have a copy of “Devotions in Honor of Our Mother of Perpetual Help?” Below is one of the prayers in this booklet, please read it and tell me what you think.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
O Mother of Perpetual Help, thou art the dispenser of all the goods which God grants to us miserable sinners, and for this reason he has made thee so powerful, so rich, and so bountiful, that thou mayest help us in our misery.
Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee. Come then, to my help, dearest Mother, for I recommend myself to thee. In thy hands I place my eternal salvation and to thee do I entrust my soul. Count me among thy most devoted servants; take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me.
For, if thou protect me, dear Mother, I fear nothing; not from my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my Judge himself, because by one prayer from thee he will be appeased.
But one thing I fear, that in the hour of temptation I may neglect to call on thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, then, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace always to have recourse to thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
See the phrase: “In thy hands I place my eternal salvation and unto thee I entrust my soul.” Really?
What about the book “Mary: Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocate,” have you read it, Thomas? Here’s just a portion of what’s written in it:
“With filial love, we the faithful wish to humbly petition you, the Vicar of Christ, to solemnly define as Christian dogma the Church’s constant teaching on Mary’s coredemptive role with Christ the Redeemer of humanity. It is our belief that such a definition will bring to light the whole truth about Mary, Daughter of the Father, Mother of the Son, Spouse of the Spirit, and Mother of the Church. Therefore, it is our prayer that the Holy Spirit will guide you, Holy Father, to define and proclaim the Blessed Virgin Mary as Coredemptrix, Mediatrix of all graces and Advocate for the people of God.”
As I said, Dr. White is just refuting what Catholics believe about Mary.
By the way, I take it that you agreed that Mary is the mother of the Word-Incarnate, does this mean you agree with Dr. James White that Mary is the mother of Jesus but not the mother of God? Because this is what the article is all about. It is not refuting the fact that Mary gave birth to Jesus. Rather, it is saying that Mary cannot be the mother of God because Jesus as God was uncreated.
Hey Alice !
Thank you for this article.
No Mary is not the mother of God .
According to Luke 1:26, The bible tell us the angel Gabriel appeared to Mary the virgin girl and said to her Rejoice highly favored one ,the Lord is with you, blessed are you among women.
The angel said to Mary you have found favor with God, He continued and said to her, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son and shall call His name Jesus.
What I’m trying to say is Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ our savior.
Let people understand the word of God carefully and also meditate in it day and night, that they may observe what is written in it.
Always let’s pray to God to bless us with the blessings of Mary the mother of Jesus Christ, we shall be blessed and highly favored.
Thank you, Alice.
Your beloved sister,
Phidia.
Shalom!
Thank you, Phidia for concurring with me that Mary is not the mother of God; but the mother of Jesus.
My mom is Roman Catholic, a devout one I can tell and there are times when we have discussions about the doctrinal errors of the Roman Catholic church. Although I can tell that she loves the Lord and really wants to please God; I can see that it is very difficult for her to accept the fact that many doctrines of her church is wrong and one of them is referring to Mary as the mother of God.
I just hope that one day she will realize how wrong she is and will start seeking for a spiritual family that will help her to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord. For now, all I can do is to keep sharing with her what the Bible really teaches and pray that God will open up her spiritual eyes and ears to the truth.
God bless you sis, shalom!
Hello Alice!
Indeed, the doctrine of Roman Catholic is different from ours. They always believe their own doctrine even if you convince them, it’s hard for them to believe what you are telling them.
I understand dear to have a mum who is a Roman Catholic, it is hard to convince her but let’s pray one day she will know the truth about the word of God and what it says.
My dear, don’t lose hope, just continue sharing with her, who knows one day she will tell you, “My daughter, now it’s true what you have told me.”
I believe God will open her spiritual eyes, and she will know the truth about His word.
My dear, just thank God; she knows there’s a God, let’s pray one day she will know the truth and be born again and be baptized in much water and also be filled with the Holy Spirit.
You know what dear, nothing is impossible with our God. When there seems to be no way, God will make a way. One day your mum will just tell you, “Now I understand my daughter.”
Thank God you have a mum whom you share the word of God with. I wish I had one.
Dear, I am praying for you and your mum too. God bless you and lift you to another level of destiny.
Thank you! Shalom!
Hello Phidia,
Thank you so much for the encouragement and prayer; it means a lot to me knowing that a fellow believer is praying for me and my mom’s salvation. It can be really frustrating at times when all I want to do is get her to know the truth but she refuses. But I know that in God’s time my mom will also accept Jesus as her Lord and Savior and we will serve God together.
So, thank you, sister Phidia. I will be praying for you as well. Please do keep in touch.
By the way, I hope you do not mind that I have copied our conversations and pasted them into the comment section of the article for all the visitors to read.
God bless and may you have a Merry Christmas.
First of all, thank you so much for this post.
So is Mary the Mother of God? No, Mary is a Mother to Jesus Christ but not to the Holy God.
Thank you again and remain blessed with God’s grace and peace!
I couldn’t agree more, David. Jesus as man had a mother, that’s Mary; but to say that she is the mother of Jesus the eternal God is just wrong. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Be blessed in Jesus’ name!
Hi,
Good article. If Mary is not the mother of God, we can call her the mother of God the Son. In all your writings I agree but in theology it is right to call her mother of Jesus or mother of the son of God.
I hope you can share your biblical understanding with me on my email.
Thanks!
Hello Kaiririou,
What a difficult name to pronounce, I’m glad I do not have to articulate it, he he! Anyway, thank you so much for taking the time to read the article.
Yes, we can call Mary the mother of Jesus but not the mother of God. One thing we need to understand is that Christ had a dual nature, divine (God) and human. As God, the Son has always existed with the Father and the Spirit, He had no beginning and no end. At the incarnation, God the Son, the second person in the Trinity added to His divine nature a second nature: human.
In order for the Son to become fully human, He needed a human mother and that’s where Mary comes in. Mary became the “God-bearer” (theotokos). Mary is the mother of Jesus who was 100% human.
Maybe this video of Frank Turek explaining the dual nature of Christ will help:
https://youtu.be/jHp4Cp6bp_4
As a human, Jesus had a mother (Mary) but as God He didn’t and didn’t need one. That’s why it’s not biblically and theologically correct to call Mary the mother of God.
Blessings!
Hi there,
I am a foreigner to the Bible. I know few things about the Lord Jesus Christ. I read your beautifully and logically described article about Mary and I support your conclusion.
My rationale is God is the creator of all human being, so all of us including Mary is HIS creation. But as an incarnation (not sure if I can write this word for Lord Jesus, my sincere apology, if this word is inappropriate to use) Mary carried Him. So she can be termed as bearer of Lord not mother in true sense.
It is the same story with Lord Krishna in Hindu religion, Yasoda carried Him (not His own mother) but she has been referred to as Mother of Lord Krishna.
I believe most people understand the meaning Mother and God bearer.
Again my apology in case if I hurt anyone’s religious belief which I never intended to do so.
Hi Anusuya, I hope you’re doing well.
I know that people from different cultures and religious affiliations have some ideas about who Jesus is and must have heard stories about Him. We must admit, Jesus is a very popular figure because of His teachings and the impact He had on the lives of many people from all walks of life.
I am glad we’re on the same page as to who God is — the Creator of all things, including Mary so she could not be the “Mother of God.” You know what? You’re absolutely right in using the word incarnation; that’s exactly what took place when Jesus took on human flesh. The Christian doctrine of incarnation is about the pre-existent divine Logos (Koine Greek for Word in John 1:1-14), the Son of God and second divine Person in the Trinity, became flesh by assuming a human nature and became a man, that is Jesus Christ. Mary carried Him so the term God-bearer or “theotokos.”
I find it interesting that there is a similar story to this in the Hindu religion. But has Lord Krishna also existed eternally as a divine being and just assumed human form through incarnation?
By the way, there’s no need for you to apologize.
Blessings!
Hi,
I am glad that I came across the website that you have been called to create. I have to admit, I found this post to be thought provoking. Like you I grew up in the Catholic church. Then as a young adult, I spent time in several other churches where I learned to read the bible and to experience God working in my life.
The thing that is kind of weird is that within the last year, I now call a catholic church my home. Now that I know more about the bible, I realize they, or at least my church, is not as far off from the bible’s teachings as what I initially thought.
As I read this post, I found myself very thankful that I have never gotten into a debate with anyone about Mary being the mother of God. In fact, I didn’t realize there were so many people that think that she is.
Sometimes people are so convinced in what they think they know or believe that they have a hard time accepting a different view point.
As we approach the Christmas season, I feel that it is important that we realize how challenging it must have been for Mary to realize that she was pregnant even though she was a young virgin. Yet, God is amazing in the ways that He works. I, for one, am so grateful that he chose a seemingly ordinary girl to give birth to Jesus Christ.
God’s love and compassion is not only for the rich, wealthy, or highly educated. Through His son, Jesus Christ, we can be assured that God knows the trials and tribulations that we face. He also knows that we are not and never will be perfect.
Well, my response has gotten long.
I pray that your week is filled with grace and peace.
Shalom Sondra, thank you so much for reading the article and sharing your thoughts in regards to who Mary is to the Catholic church.
You are absolutely right! There are actually Catholics today who do not hold to all the doctrines held and taught by the Roman Catholic church. And this came as a result of regular Bible reading and study. If every Christian would just read and study their Bible and submit to its final authority as the Word of God, I believe there wouldn’t be any need for discussions like this.
Some say that Christians should not focus on their differences, but rather on their similarities. I agree! But let me ask, “If what your neighbor believes and practices is against the Word of God, would you not let them know?” We can talk about love, caring, compassion, etc, all we want but if we do not tell people the truth, God will hold us accountable in the end.
But there is a right way to do things. We cannot just approach somebody and say, “Hey, you’re wrong about this and that!” We need the wisdom of God to make them realize that calling Mary the mother of God is unbiblical and praying to God through her is wrong.
In the same way that God fulfilled His plan to bring a Savior into the world because Mary willingly accepted God’s calling, we too can be an instrument of God in doing His task. All God needs from us is our willingness and submission.
God bless you and may you have a Merry Christmas!
Being raised a Christian and having heard this prior to reading your article I never gave it very much thought. It is a very debatable phrase for a Christian in that “Mother of God” in my opinion could not refer to Mary mother of Jesus Christ.
And as a Christian I believe in the Trinity which means that Jesus Christ is not God but the son of God and the Holy Spirit being the third of the Trinity. But I do believe this would begin another completely different discussion.
Thank you for these views and I am sure you are going to have many people debating this phrases and its appropriate use.
Susan
Hello Susan, thank you for taking the time to read the article.
If you were to really listen to the reasoning of those who call Mary the “Mother of God” you will find it unthinkable how they have come to that conclusion. But hey, they did not come up with this all on their own. They were raised believing this is the proper way to honor Mary, God’s chosen vessel to bring Jesus Christ into this world. So we have to carefully explain to them from a sound biblical perspective why this is a gross misunderstanding.
As to the Trinity, I can refute what you said about Jesus being the Son of God but not God. But I would rather refer you to an article to explain why a correct understanding of the Bible will lead one to conclude that Jesus being the Son of God makes Him God. Here’s the article, I how you will take the time to read and tell me what you think about it.
https://biblical-christianity.com/arguments-against-the-deity-of-christ
Merry Christmas!
Very interesting article about the “Mother of God” which is actually how I was raised, as I was raised Catholic. I do not currently attend the Catholic Church, however, and have come to realize some problems within the church, like all the Mary statues, which God frowns upon. They do tend to idolize Mary for some reason and even have prayers to her directly. So great article. I’d love to show my Mom, but she would probably be pretty upset. LOL.
Hello Babsie, thank you for your comment. Most of us have been raised in the traditional faith (Catholic) so we know what is being taught. Having been raised in the Catholic faith and attended Catholic schools, I literally practiced and followed every doctrine they teach. And just like you, I came to realize that something was “wrong” because a lot of the things they practice aren’t inline with biblical doctrines.
I understand that there are those who call themselves “devoted Catholics” and these are the people who are rather difficult to reach and share biblical truths to. In the case of your mom, I don’t think it’s a good idea to let her read stuff like this before making her understand beforehand that the Bible is the final authority, not the Catholic church led by the papacy, or any other church for that matter.
If we start the sharing (or discussion) by attacking their church about what they believe and teach about Mary, statues, etc., they will become defensive and won’t listen anymore to whatever we are going to say as they are busy thinking about their defense. But we can show them the truth by continuously sharing with them what the Bible really teaches and most especially by loving them the same way Jesus loves us.
God bless!
Thank you for sharing with us this inspiring post. Yes, Mary is not the mother of God because Mary is human and a human being can’t create God.
I know well that there is only one God who is the creator of humanity and I believe in him.
Mary has fulfilled the will of God by giving birth to Jesus who had been with God in the beginning so that he come to save humanity.
Hello Julienne, thanks for stopping by and I appreciate you sharing your thoughts on this rather controversial topic. The Bible is very clear that God created all things in heaven and on earth, and that includes us. We are created beings and so as Mary so she could not be the mother of God. God exists all on His own; He has existed from eternity past and will continue to exist up to eternity in the future.
I know a lot of Catholics who do not hold to this teaching anymore as a result of diligently doing their part of reading and studying Scriptures. I just hope more people will be enlightened regarding this doctrinal error.
Blessings!